Patna Court April 1992 Judgments
Dr. Ushapuri Vs. Ashwani Kumar Das.
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Apr-22-1992
K.P. Sinha, Member: 1. This is an appeal against the order of the District Forum dated 28.11.90 as modified their order dated 20.6.91. The District Forum, Patna by its above mentioned orders awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,000/- to the complainant (appellant before us). 2. The complaint case in brief is that the O.P. Shri Ashwani Kumar Das, Hony. Secretary, Anand Vihar Griha Nirman Sahayog Samitti Ltd., was advanced Rs. 10,000/- for allotment of a plot of land bearing No. B12 of the above mentioned Sahayog Samitti but did not execute the sale deed for the same. The District Forum issued notices to the O.P. but they refused to take notice and since refusal to accept notice is tantamount to service of the notice, the District Forum heard the matter ex-parte and passed the above mentioned order dated 28.11.90 as modified by its order dated 20.6.91. 3. The appellant have come up before us against the above mentioned order of the District Forum fixing compensation of Rs. 200/as cost for con...
Tag this Judgment!Most. Sukhia and anr. Vs. Took NaraIn Whish Wakarma and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-17-1992
S. Ali Ahmad, J. 1. This second appeal arisesout of a suit filed by the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of Rs. 5001/- (Rs. 4000/- principal and Rs. 1001/- by way of interest). The suit was dismissed, on appeal the same was decreed, and thereafter this Second Appeal. 2. Shortly stated, the facts of this case are that the defendant-appellant No. 1 Most. Sukhia executed a usufructuary mortgage deed on the 7th of December, 1973 after receiving Rs. 4000/-. It was stated in the deed that in case the plaintiff did not get possession of the mortgage house, then the interest at the rate of Rs. 1 / - per month will be payable. It is said that possession of the house in question could not be taken by the plaintiff. Thereafter the suit was filed for realisation of Rs. 5001/-(including interest). The debtor Most. Sukhia was impleaded as defendant No. 1. Her son and daughter were also made defendants. 3. The suit was contested by defendant No. 1 mainly on the ground that she was a scheduled de...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Geetanjali Silk House Vs. the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Ot ...
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Apr-16-1992
K.P. Sinha, Member: 1. This is a complaint filed by M/s. Geetanjali Silk House (hereinafter called the complainant) through its Proprietor Shri Awadesh Kishore Prasad against New India Assurance Company and Others (hereinafter called the opposite party No. 1 and the State Bank of India SSthe opposite-party No. 2). It has been contended in the complaint petition that the complainant took Insurance Policy for his shop for Rs. 2.5 lakhs against fire and other risks on 9.5.89 vide Policy No. 4852020300875 for a period of one year against fire and other risks. A fire broke down in the shop of the complainant on 25.3.90 causing a loss of Rs. 2,36,000/- and on the claim filed by the complainant, opposite party No. 1 paid a sum of Rs. 50,472/- only to the bankers of the complainant the State Bank of India (opposite party No. 2) who had advanced the loan to the complainant. It has been contended that while the Surveyors of opposite party No. 1 assessed the loss to the complainant on account of ...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Engineer Telegraph Vs. Bishwanath Pd.
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Apr-13-1992
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 30th March, 1991 in complaint case No. 2 passed by the District Forum, Saran (Chapra), directing the appellant to pay compensation of Rs. 500/- to the respondent on account of the harassment caused to the respondent-complainant in complaint petition, due to illegal disconnection of his telephone. 2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated. The complainant has Telephone No. 2515 and one Satya Narain Gupta, Draftsman in the Telephone Department was demanding Rs. 50/- as illegal gratification which the complainant-respondent refused to give, as a result of which his telephone was disconnected on 31.8.90 by the officer in the telephone department in connivance with that Satya Narain Gupta. On enquiry made by the complainant to the department he was informed that his telephone connection was disconnected due to non payment of bill dated 1.4.90, though the complainant had paid that bill on 7.6.90. The complainan...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Engineer Telegraph Vs. Bacha Prasad
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Apr-01-1992
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 23.8.91 passed by the District Forum, Saran (Chapra) in Complaint Case No. 79 of 1991, directing the appellant to restore the telephone No. 2862 of the respondent within 15 days of the order. 2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated that Telephone No. 2862 belongs to the Chapra Motors and a sum of Rs. 4.462.70 paise was due from him in respect of different charges for which the telephone of the complainant respondent was disconnected. The complainant filed complaint before the District Forum alleging that it was unwarranted on the part of the O.P. to disconnect that telephone and the District Forum passed the impugned order, directing the appellant to restore the telephone of the complainant respondent within 15 days. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that impugned order asking the appellant to restore the telephone connection of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›